JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J. 1. In this instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to fix and finalize the pension on the basis of pay-scale which has been granted vide order dated 13.10.2010 and to release the entire arrears of difference of salary and further to release amount of leave encashment. 2. The facts, in brief, is that the petitioner joined his services as Chowkidar on 08.08.1971. Thereafter, the petitioner had been appointed afresh to the post of Correspondence Clerk vide order dated 17.05.1978 and ultimately superannuated from the post of Correspondence Clerk w.e.f 31.08.2013. It has further been averred that the petitioner during his entire service career has not been granted any regular promotion in spite of the fact that he was eligible to be granted regular promtion to the higher posts I.e post of Head Clerk and the post of Head Assistant as per the hierarchy of the post, as evident from circular issued vide order dated 9.5.2005, which suggests that the post of Correspondence Clerkis the basic grade and the next hierarchy of the said post in the Head Clerk and thereafter, the post of Head Assistant bearing pay-scale of Rs. 5000-8000/- and Rs. 5500-9000/- respectively. It has further been averred that w.e.f 1.9.2009 the basis of recommendation of 6th Pay Revision Committee the scheme of MACP has been implemented which provides that after completion of 10 years, 20 years and 30 years of service, the employee will be entitled to get three up-gradations. It has been contended that though the petitioner has been granted 3rd up-gradation in the pay-scale and thereafter he superannuated on 21.08.2013 but unfairly for a long period his pension has not been fixed and finalized by the office of Accountant General in spite of the fact that the entire documents have been forwarded by the office of Road Construction Department on 24.09.2013. Thereafter, another communication was also sent by the Executive Engineer of the Department on 1.4.2014 requesting to forthwith finalize the pension and gratuity of the petitioner, but, the same has not been finalized. However, the petitioner has been paid the provisional pension. 3. After some argument, referring to the decision rendered in the case of Messren Kerketta Vs. Thereafter, another communication was also sent by the Executive Engineer of the Department on 1.4.2014 requesting to forthwith finalize the pension and gratuity of the petitioner, but, the same has not been finalized. However, the petitioner has been paid the provisional pension. 3. After some argument, referring to the decision rendered in the case of Messren Kerketta Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors passed in W.P. (S) No. 3990 of 2014 dated 02.03.2017, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the said decision and if case of the petitioner is disposed of in terms of the judgments in Messren Kerketta (Supra), the grievances of the petitioner shall be redressed. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents though initially raised objection to the prayer made by the petitioner, but, does not dispute the law laid down in the case of Messren Kerketta (Supra) 5. In view of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and law laid down in Messren Kerketta (Supra), the respondent-Account General, Jharkhand is directed to issue PPO in favour of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order with all consequential benefits. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Resultantly, I.A. No. 2887 of 2017 also stands disposed of.